P-ISSN: 2303-2898 | E-ISSN: 2549-6662 Vol. 10, No.

1, April 2021
Received: 23 Januari 2020 | Accepted: 03 Februari 2021 | Published: 30 April 2021

TRANSLATING THAT:
AN IDEATIONAL CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS OF
MACHINE TRANSLATION
Ardik Ardianto1*
1
Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia
*e-mail: ardikardianto@gmail.com

Abstrak
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk membandingkan hasil terjemahan dua mesin terjemahan, yakni Google
Translate dan Bing Translator, dalam menerjemahkan leksem that pada artikel berita. Pendekatan yang
digunakan dalam menelaah kesejajaran hasil terjemahan dari leksem that pada penelitian ini adalah
linguistik sistemik fungsional, khususnya pada struktur eksperiensial dan logis. Jenis analisis yang
digunakan adalah komparatif deskriptif. Data yang digunakan meliputi 40 satuan kebahasaan dari leksem
that yang diambil dari enam artikel Berita Dunia BBC. Hasil temuan menunjukkan bahwa dua mesin
terjemahan mampu mengenali tiga fungsi leksem that, yakni fungsi inti (Head), fungsi post-modifier, dan
fungsi konjungsi. Fungsi terbanyak yang ditemukan adalah fungsi post-modifier (19 kali atau 47,5%), yang
diikuti dengan fungsi konjungsi (17 kali atau 42,5% pada mesin pertama dan 18 kali atau 45% pada mesin
kedua). Fungsi inti menjadi fungsi terakhir setelah kedua fungsi lainnya (empat kali atau 10% pada mesin
pertama dan tiga kali atau 7,5% pada mesin kedua). Lebih lanjut, dikarenakan adanya variasi elipsis dari
leksem that sebagai pronomina relatif dan post-determiner pada mesin terjemahan pertama, penelitian ini
menyimpulkan bahwa hasil terjemahan mesin pertama lebih akurat, berterima, kreatif, dan kontekstual
daripada hasil terjemahan mesin kedua.

Kata kunci: Linguistik Sistemik Fungsional; Struktur Eksperiensial; Struktur Logis

Abstract
This paper aims to contrast the translation of two machine translation systems, Google Translate and Bing
Translator, in translating the lexeme in news articles. The approach used in scrutinizing the lexeme's
translation correspondence in this study is systemic functional linguistics, especially in both experiential
and logical structures. This study was carried out through descriptive comparative analysis. This study's
data were 40 constituents that were taken from six BBC World news articles randomly selected. A
thorough analysis demonstrates that the two machine translation systems can recognize the three
functions of that, i.e., Head, post-modifier, and conjunction. The highest emerging function is post-modifier
by 19 times (47.5%), followed by the conjunction function by 17 times (42.5%) on the first machine
translation system and 18 times (45%) on the second one. The lowest emerging function is Head by four
times (10%) on the first machine translation system and three times (7.5%) on the second one.
Furthermore, due to the elliptical variation of that as a relative pronoun and the translation variation of that
as a post-determiner, it concludes that the translation outputs of Google Translate are more accurate,
semantically acceptable, creative, and contextual than those of Bing Translator.

Keywords: Experiential Structure; Logical Structure; Systemic Functional Linguistics

This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Copyright © 2021 by Author. Published by Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha.

Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.23887/jish-undiksha.v10i1.23140 Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora | 11

Ardik Ardianto | Translating That: An Ideational Correspondence Analysis of Machine Translation
INTRODUCTION
Translation, nowadays, does not
merely involve the manual translation
process by a human translator; further,
following the global information technology
trends, translation has begun to enter a new
era, i.e., the digital translation era. In the last
several decades, digital translation started
getting notable attention in translation
studies. In general, there are numerous
experts acceding that the digital translation
consists of two central classifications,
computer-assisted translation and machine
translation (Hartley, 2009; Williams &
Chesterman, 2002). According to Munday
(2016), the distinctive features of these two
classifications reside in the process and the
intended use. The computer-assisted
translation rather highlights the assistance
process in facilitating, accelerating, and
easing the series of translation processes
carried out by a human translator, ranging
from the pre-translation to post-translation
process. Whilst, the machine translation is
increasingly used in the initial information-
distributing process, which in this case
refers to the preliminary draft composition
(often undertaken by the European
Commission). It aims at triggering varied
inputs or feedbacks for further reviews,
editing, and proofreading by professional
translators.
Machine translation is an automated
and independence computational system to
translate a text (Ahangar et al., 2012). This
automated computational system was then
developed so as to further facilitate the
process of translating one language to
another in the absence of any human
assistance. During its development over the
past fifty years, automatic machine
translation has been enhanced and refined
through numerous paradigms, including
dictionary-based machine translation,
example-based machine translation, and
rule-based machine translation (Pilevar &
Faili, 2010). Inevitably, each type has its
own advantages and drawbacks.
Several studies have evinced that
despite its incredibly rapid progress, rule-
based machine translation seemingly still
encounters a number of difficulties in
translating various languages. Putri and Ardi
(2015), for instance, demonstrated that the
rule/statistic-based machine translation, i.e.
Google Translate (GT), faced varied
difficulties in translating folklore texts from
Indonesian language to English, such as 1)
inequivalent/incorrect and omitted diction, 2)
errors in the word, phrase, even sentence
structure, and 3) errors in translating
unknown words or realia. In accord with
these findings, Ismail and Hartono (2016) in
their study showed that GT also
encountered many difficulties in translating
news articles from Indonesian language to
English. The major difficulties found in the
study were mainly related to grammatical
and terminological errors—apart from other
errors, e.g., the ambiguity creation, and
punctuation and capitalization errors. It also
concluded that the difficulties occurred due
to varied factors, including the lack of
machine ability to recognize the context of
the text provided (bearing in mind that GT is
mainly based on statistics/rules), and the
machine incapability of identifying errors
existed in the source texts and consequently
created errors in the target texts.
However, despite those difficulties and
errors, recently due to the current Neural
Machine Translation (NMT) system, both GT
and Bing Translator (BT) generated
outstanding results (> 90% accuracy)
pertaining to the orthography and grammar
and good ones on the lexical and
grammatical collocations (79.8% for GT and
74.5% for BT) in translating journalistic texts
(Almahasees, 2018). Similar to this findings,
Achmad (2016) also pointed out that the
translation quality of GT is better than that of
BT as regards scientific texts.
Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora | 12
Ardik Ardianto | Translating That: An Ideational Correspondence Analysis of Machine Translation
Although several studies mentioned
have investigated errors occurred in
machine translation outputs, to some extent
there has not been yet any studies
contrasting the outputs of two machine
translation systems, particularly focusing on
the lexeme that. I assume that due to the
use of a distinct corpora database, one
machine translation system will produce
different outputs contrasted with another
one. Therefore, this paper strives to
scrutinize how such contrast is actualized in
the outputs of these two machine
translation systems. The rationale behind
the selection of GT and BT in this study
was due to their well-known good quality
(Achmad, 2016; Almahasees, 2018) and
their popularity throughout the world
(Precup-Stiegelbauer, 2013). The
contrastive analysis incorporates two shift
aspects, i.e. the structural shift and the
syntactical function shift, especially on the
Table 1. Experiential and Logical Structures of Noun Phrase (1)
Modified from Halliday (Ibid.)
(1) Those two-splendid old electric trains with pantographs
pre-modifier
those two splendid old
epithet
deictic numerative
attitude quality
determiner numeral adjective adjective
As illustrated in Table 1, these experiential
and logical structures merely represent the
syntactical slots wherein the realization of
each slot can be filled by various
constituents. Therefore, it can be said that a
constituent, whether it is in the form of
word, compound word, or even phrase, can
fill each categorical slot freely or flexibly. In
regard to this, it is highly possible for the
lexeme that to play a role or fill distinct
categories depending on the function
ideational structure1 (cf. Dwijatmoko, 2019,
who used three metafunctions in his
analysis).
In analyzing both syntactical
structure and function, Halliday and
Matthiessen (2014) proposed two main
structures, namely experiential structure
and logical structure of each constituent.
The experiential structure refers to the
element of THING in each constituent
class; meanwhile, the logical structure
refers to the element of how the logic of the
constituent classes works in the larger
construction. The experiential structure in a
noun phrase, for instance, is classified into
four categories, i.e., deictic, numerative,
epithet, and classifier. Whereas, the logical
structure is merely classified into two
categories, namely pre-modifier and post-
modifier. For further details regarding these
two structures, it can be seen in the Table
1.
Head post-modifier
electric trains with pantographs
classifier Thing qualifier
adjective noun prepositional phrase
preposition noun
head thing
preferred. Perceived from its logical
structure category, the lexeme that can
occupy three categories, i.e., as a pre-
modifier, as a Head, and as a post-modifier,
as well as one function as a conjunction.
1. That as a Pre-modifier
The lexeme that as a pre-
modifier is realized in the form of
demonstrative determiner, functioning
as a deictic. Demonstrative in this
context indicates two aspects, namely
Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora | 13
Ardik Ardianto | Translating That: An Ideational Correspondence Analysis of Machine Translation

1) proximity or distance, that is far from deictic, in that it attributes the

the collocutor; and 2) quantity, that is definiteness on the noun Head (Thing).
singular. Furthermore, the determiner The detailed elaboration on this can be
in this example also functions as a seen in Table 2.

Table 2. That as a Pre-modifier

(2) That man under the tree is my brother
pre-modifier Head post-modifier
that man under the tree
deictic Thing qualifier
demonstrative
noun prepositional phrase
determiner
preposition noun phrase
Head Thing
determiner noun

2. That as a Head Head, this constituent thus can

independently exist without other
Apart from being a pre-modifier,
constituents to modify it. Table 3 below
the lexeme that can function as a Head
illustrates that as a Head in either
in either subject or object of a
subject or object of a sentence.
sentence. Due to its function as a

Table 3. That as a Head

Subject That is the problem we should face.
Object I do not eat that

3. That as a Post-modifier lexeme that is not necessarily required

(rather, optional), and ergo can be
The third function of the lexeme
omitted if necessary. The following
that is as a post-modifier of a noun
examples, sentence (3) and (3a),
Head in the form of relative pronoun
demonstrate that as a post-modifier.
(as a qualifier) used to initiate a
relative clause. In its realization, the

Table 4. That as a post-modifier

The cat that ate your fish came to me last night
(3a) The cat eating your fish came to me last night
pre-modifier Head post-modifier
the cat that ate your fish
deictic Thing qualifier
determiner noun relative pronoun verb noun phrase
possessive
noun
determiner

Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora | 14

Ardik Ardianto | Translating That: An Ideational Correspondence Analysis of Machine Translation

4. That as a Conjunction subordinate clause, whether as a noun

clause (subject–object) or as a
Last, the lexeme that can also
complement clause.
function as a conjunction to introduce a

Table 5. That as a post-modifier

Noun Clause
Subject That he always loves you is the fact you cannot deny
Object I know that he always loves you
Complement Clause
The fact is that he always loves you
Subject
I am sure that he always loves you

This study aimed at scrutinizing the
ideational structures of the lexeme that in
the two machine translation systems. The
analysis was carried out by contrasting,
therefore finding out the similarities and
differences, the experiential structure and
logical structure of those lexemes. It was
specifically focused on two aspects, i.e.,
function and category of the lexeme that.
This study, moreover, was expected to be
of beneficiary for describing how the
lexeme that was translated into the two
machine translation systems and to what
extent the translation outputs were
corresponded to the originals in terms of
both function and category in the
experiential and logical structures.
METHODS
This study is a contrastive analysis
focusing on two major axes, i.e., similarities
and differences of the translation of two
machine translation systems in translating
the lexeme that. The machine translation
systems used were Google Translate and
Bing Translator. These two systems were
selected on the grounds that both are the
most popular machine translation systems
that are frequently used worldwide (Precup-
Stiegelbauer, 2013). The data were
retrieved from the global news channel, that
is BBC News, consisting of six news
articles randomly selected. The data of this
study comprised forty constituents that in
English (Source Text) and the translation in
Indonesian language (Target Text). The
data analysis was carried out in two stages:
1) the percentage calculation of each
function and category of the lexeme that in
both machine translation systems; 2) the
elaboration of contrastive analysis
(similarities and differences) of the
translation.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Based on the translation of the two
machine translation systems, i.e., Google
Translate (GT) and Bing Translator (BT),
each function and category of the lexeme
that is thoroughly elaborated in the Table 6.

Table 6. The overview of function and category in Google Translate

Percentage
System Function Category
Partial Total
Translate
Google

pronoun (begitulah) 1 (2.5%)

(GT)

Head pronoun (itulah) 1 (2.5%) 4 (10%)

pronoun (itu) 2 (5%)

Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora | 15

Ardik Ardianto | Translating That: An Ideational Correspondence Analysis of Machine Translation

adverb (sebelumnya) 1 (2.5%)

phrase (seperti itu) 1 (2.5%)
phrase (dari itu) 1 (2.5%)
Post-modifier 19 (47.5%)
pronoun (yang) 10 (25%)
pronoun (yang itu) 1 (2.5%)
determiner (itu) 5 (12.5%)
particle (bahwa) 15 (37.5%)
Conjunction 17 (42.5%)
Ø (bahwa) 2 (5%)
Total 40 (100%)

Table 7. The overview of function and category in Bing Translator

Percentage
System Function Category
Partial Total
pronoun (itulah) 2 (5%)
Bing Translator (BT)

Head 3 (7.5%)
pronoun (itu) 1 (2.5%)
adverb (sebelum itu) 1 (2.5%)
phrase (seperti itu) 1 (2.5%)
phrase (dari itu) 1 (2.5%) 19
Post-modifier
pronoun (yang) 10 (25%) (47.5%)
pronoun (yang satu) 1 (2.5%)
determiner (itu) 5 (12.5%)
Conjunction particle (bahwa) 18 (45%)
Total 40 (100%)

From the table 6 and 7 above, it
can be seen that the most frequently
occurring function of the lexeme that was
as post-modifier (19 times or 47.5% in each
machine translation system). On the first
machine, such function of post-modifier was
distributed in the form of the adverb
sebelumnya (previously) once (2.5%), the
phrase seperti itu (such that) once (2.5%),
the phrase dari itu (of which) once (2.5%),
the relative pronoun yang (that) by ten
times (25%), the demonstrative relative
pronoun yang itu (that one) once (2.5%),
and the deictic determiner itu (that) by five
times (12.5%). Meanwhile on the second
machine, it was distributed in the form of
the adverb sebelum itu (prior to that) once
(2.5%), the phrase seperti itu (such that)
once (2.5%), the phrase dari itu (of which)
once (2.5%), the relative pronoun yang
(that) by ten times (25%), the relative
pronoun yang satu (that one) once (2.5%),
and the deictic determiner itu (that) by five
times (12.5%). The difference of these two
machines relied on the adverbs
sebelumnya – sebelum itu (previously and
prior to that) and relative pronouns yang itu
– yang satu (both mean that one).
Furthermore, the second most occurring
function was as conjunction, realized in the
form of the Indonesian particle bahwa
(that). On the first machine, this function of
conjunction occurred 17 times (42.5%)
distributed into two, i.e., the Indonesian
particle bahwa (that) by 15 times (37.5%)
and Ø twice (5%); whereas, on the second
machine, it occurred 18 times (45%). The
function of Head occurred in the third place,
in the form of the pronoun begitulah (that
so) and itulah (that) by four times (10%) in
the first machine and in the form of the
pronoun itulah (that) by three times (7.5%)
in the second one.

Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora | 16

Ardik Ardianto | Translating That: An Ideational Correspondence Analysis of Machine Translation

kesempatan yang luar biasa

Similarities of the Two Machine
untuk mencoba dan membantu
Translation Systems
orang-orang yang telah menderita
1. That as a Head seperti yang Anda derita,” kata
The two machines generated the George Brandis.
similar translation as to the function of that “Anda telah mengambil
as a Head. Both put the pronoun that as kesedihan itu dan mengubahnya
the Head of the subject of the sentence. menjadi kesempatan yang indah
That’s barely enough money to pay the BT : untuk mencoba dan membantu
rent. (Article 3) orang yang telah menderita
Translation: seperti yang Anda telah
Itu hampir tidak cukup uang menderita,” kata George Brandis.
GT :
untuk membayar sewa.
From the translation above, it can
Itu hampir tidak cukup uang
BT : be recognized that the structure of noun
untuk membayar sewa.
phrase that grief did not undergo such
2. That as a Post-modifier categorical shift at all. Nevertheless, due to
The translation similarity between the distinct syntactical construction between
these two machines can be seen in several the English language and the Indonesian
sentences containing the determiner as language, the logical structure of pre-
follows: modifier was transformed into post-
“You have taken that grief and turned it into modifier.2 This such categorical shift—in
a wonderful opportunity to try and help Vinay and Darbelnet’s term “servitude or
people who have suffered as you have obligatory transposition” (Munday, 2016, p.
suffered,” George Brandis said. (Article 2) 93; Vinay & Darbelnet, 1995, pp. 27–30)—
Translation: inevitably occurs in two languages with a
“Anda telah menerima kesedihan different syntactical construction.
GT :
itu dan mengubahnya menjadi

Table 8. Experiential - logical structures (English - Indonesian language)

Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora | 17

Ardik Ardianto | Translating That: An Ideational Correspondence Analysis of Machine Translation

3. That as a Post-modifier and a Translation:

Conjunction “Ini memberikan demonstrasi
In this section, it is noteworthy to pertama bahwa di alam liar ada
bear in mind that despite embodying three korelasi antara populasi yang
different lexemes that in one complex mendapatkan penyakit dan
sentence, both machines were able to GT : populasi yang tetap bebas
identify their distinct functions—two penyakit, dan campuran bakteri
lexemes functioned as post-modifier in the pada kulit,” kata Dr Lewis
form of relative pronoun yang (that), and Campbell dari University of
the rest lexeme functioned as the Exeter.
conjunction in the form of the Indonesian
particle bahwa (that) followed by the object “Ini memberikan demonstrasi
complement clause. pertama bahwa di alam liar ada
korelasi antara populasi yang
“This gives the first
mendapatkan penyakit dan
demonstration that in the BT : populasi yang tetap bebas
wild there is a correlation
penyakit, dan campuran bakteri
between populations that
pada kulit,” kata Dr Lewis
get disease and
Campbell dari University of
populations that remain
Exeter.
disease-free, and the mix of
bacteria on the skin,” said
Dr Lewis Campbell from the
University of Exeter. (Article
1)

Illustration 1. The conjunction function in English and Indonesian language

As for the experiential and population that get disease

logical structures of the lexeme that as a Thing qualifier
post-modifier, it can be seen in the relative
following Table 9 and 10. noun verb noun
pronoun

Table 9. Experiential - logical structures of Table 10. Experiential - logical structures of

the lexeme that as a post-modifier (English) the lexeme that as a post-modifier
Head post-modifier (Indonesian language)

Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora | 18

Ardik Ardianto | Translating That: An Ideational Correspondence Analysis of Machine Translation
Head post-modifier
populas mendapatka penyaki
yang
i n t conjunction than the second one, Bing
Thing qualifier
relative
noun pronou verb noun
n pronoun. It affirmed several studies
Differences of the Two Machine
Translation Systems
Albeit the translation of these two
machines was mostly equal in term of
sentence construction, there were still
differences emerging between Google and
Bing Translator. The following section will
elaborate such differences.
1. Elliptical Variation of the Relative
Pronoun That
It’s not the first time that
militias and libertarians in
the state have made
headlines. (Article 4)
Translation:
Ini bukan pertama kalinya Ø
(bahwa) milisi dan libertarian di
GT : negara bagian ini menjadi berita
utama.
Ini bukan pertama kalinya bahwa
BT : milisi dan libertarian di negara
telah membuat berita utama.
Based on the translation above,
it can be identified that in the first
machine, the lexeme that was omitted
whereas in the second one was
translated into the Indonesian particle
bahwa. The subordinate function, which
to some degree refers to the relative
pronoun that, was basically optional and
thus could either be presented or omitted
(Thomas, 1993). Due to its optionality,
the translation of the first machine can be
considered acceptable semantically and
syntactically. In fact, based on the
similarity of other findings acquired, it can
be proven that the first machine, Google
Translate, was indeed more creative and
could generate more variants in
translating the relative pronoun that as a
Translator. There was none of the
translation generated by Bing Translator
pertaining to the omission of the relative
(Achmad, 2016; Almahasees, 2018)
pointing out that Google Translate is
more creative and readable than Bing
Translator.
2. Translation Errors
It was found that there were
translation errors in the second
machine, Bing Translator, while
translating the lexeme that as a
subordinator of the following subordinate
clause. The following examples illustrate
how such errors occurred in the
translation.
It's part of a bigger project
that Ashee hopes will
eventually incorporate a
medical centre and
additional housing.
(Article 3)
Translation:
Itu bagian dari proyek yang lebih
besar yang diharapkan Ashee
GT : pada akhirnya akan
menggabungkan pusat medis dan
perumahan tambahan.
Ini adalah bagian dari proyek yang
lebih besar bahwa Ashee
BT : berharap pada akhirnya akan
menggabungkan pusat medis dan
perumahan tambahan.
The second machine translated
the subordinator that into the Indonesian
particle bahwa instead of the relative
pronoun yang. Such translation cannot
be considered acceptable due to the
distinct function of yang (relative
pronoun) and bahwa (particle) in the
Indonesian language system.
Specifically, there is only one single
Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora | 19
Ardik Ardianto | Translating That: An Ideational Correspondence Analysis of Machine Translation
acceptable translation to translate the
lexeme that as a relative pronoun in a
subordinate clause, that is the pronoun
yang. Besides, in terms of the sentence
structure, the translation of the second
machine seems unnatural and highly
literal compared to one of the first
machine—Google Translate could even
transform the diathesis of the relative
clause structure from the active
construction in the ST into the passive
construction in the TT.
3. Translation Variation of That as a
Post-modifier
Apart from its ability of
generating the elliptical variation of the
relative pronoun that, Google Translate
could also achieve the variant
equivalence of the lexeme that as a
post-modifier through the use of adverbs
(temporal adverbial). This differed from
the translation of the second machine,
Bing Translator, that seemingly tended
to translate every constituent literally by
word-for-word.
Before that he used the
name Saima, and wore
women's clothes, but had to
give up his third-gender
identity to gain his family's
acceptance.
(Artikel 3)
Translation:
Sebelumnya dia menggunakan
nama Saima, dan mengenakan
pakaian wanita, tetapi harus
GT : melepaskan identitas gender
ketiga untuk mendapatkan
penerimaan keluarganya.
Sebelum itu ia menggunakan
nama Saima, dan mengenakan
BT : pakaian wanita, tetapi harus
menyerah identitas gender ketiga
untuk mendapatkan penerimaan
keluarganya.
Although these two translations,
sebelumnya and sebelum itu, are
acceptable semantically and
syntactically in the Indonesian language,
the use of translation variant in the first
machine gives added values for Google
Translate over Bing Translator.
Besides, by using the adverb
sebelumnya, the translation generated
by Google Translate seems more
contextual and natural than one of Bing
Translator, which tended to be formal.
Through its ability of translating the
phrase before that into the single adverb
sebelumnya, it can be justified that the
algorithm used by Google Translate
does not focus solely on word-for-word
equivalence, but also on its pragmatic
use.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Translating the lexeme that
becomes one of many challenging issues for
machine translation since it possesses
various distinct functions and categories.
Based on the findings acquired, it can be
said that the two machine translation
systems, Google Translate and Bing
Translator, could translate the lexeme that
very well—regardless several translation
irregularities in the second machine.
Furthermore, both machines could properly
identify the three functions of the lexeme
that, i.e., as a Head, as a post-modifier, and
as a conjunction. The function of post-
modifier was the most frequently occurring
function by 19 times (47.5%), followed by
the function of conjunction by 17 times
(42.5%) in the first machine and by 18 times
(45%) in the second one. The function of
Head ranked third with the occurrence
frequency of four times (10%) in the first
machine and of three times (7.5%) in the
second one. To sum up, due to a number of
considerations, such as the elliptical
variation of the relative pronoun that and the
translation variants of the lexeme that as a
post-modifier, the translation outputs of
Google Translate were considered more
Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora | 20
Ardik Ardianto | Translating That: An Ideational Correspondence Analysis of Machine Translation
accurate, semantically acceptable, creative,
and contextual than those of Bing
Translator.
ENDNOTE
1. The ideational structure, in this study, is
derived from the systemic functional
linguistics by Halliday (2014) used to
identify a phrase construction in a
clause.
2. Despite the transformation of the logical
structure of pre-modifier into post-
modifier as the result of adapting the
Indonesian syntactical system, the
experiential function of its constituents,
however, remained the same.
REFERENCES
Achmad, A. (2016). Kualitas terjemahan
teks ilmiah hasil penerjemahan mesin
Google Translate dan Bing Translator.
Indonesian Journal of Applied
Linguistics Review, 1(1), 1–20.
Ahangar, A. A., Jahangiri, N., &
Mohammadpour, F. (2012). A Lexical-
functional model for machine
translation of English zero-place
predicators into Persian. International
Journal of English Linguistics, 2(3), 2–
9. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v2n3p2
Almahasees, Z. M. (2018). Assessment of
Google and Microsoft Bing translation
of journalistic texts. International
Journal of Languages, Literature and
Linguistics, 4(3), 231–235.
Briggs, H. (2019, June 22). ‘Friendly’
bacteria could help save frogs from
disease. BBC News. Retrieved from
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-
environment-48707650.
Dwijatmoko, B. B. (2019). Life and death in
Andersen’s “Grandmother”: A systemic
functional grammar analysis. Jurnal
Kata: Penelitian Tentang Ilmu Bahasa
Dan Sastra, 3(1), 144–154.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.
(2014). Halliday’s introduction to
functional grammar. Routledge.
Hartley, A. (2009). Technology and
translation. In J. Munday (Ed.), The
routledge companion to translation
studies (pp. 106–127). Routledge.
Inside Pakistan’s first retirement home for
third-gender people (2019, June 21),
BBC News. Retrieved from
https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-
48707042.
Iran: New US sanctions target Supreme
Leader Khamenei (2019, June 24).
BBC News. Retrieved from
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-
canada-48748544.
Ismail, A., & Hartono, R. (2016). Errors
made in Google Translate in the
Indonesian to English translations of
news item texts. Journal of English
Language Teaching, 5(2), 1–6.
London bridge attack: Sara Zelenak’s
parents begin charity bike ride (2019,
June 23), BBC News. Retrieved from
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-
england-london-48736087.
Munday, J. (2016). Introducing translation
studies: Theories and applications (5th
ed.). Routledge.
Pilevar, M. T., & Faili, H. (2010).
PersianSMT: A first attempt to English-
Persian statistical machine translation.
JADT 2010: 10th International
Conference on Statistical Analysis of
Textual Data, 1101–1111.
Precup-Stiegelbauer, L.-R. (2013).
Automatic Translations Versus Human
Translations in Nowadays World.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 70, 1768–1777.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
sbspro.2013.01.252
Putri, G. G., & Ardi, H. (2015). Types of
errors found in Google Translation: A
model of MT evaluation. Proceedings
of the Third International Seminar on
English Language and Teaching
(ISELT-3), 183–188.
Thomas, L. (1993). Beginning syntax.
Blackwell.
Tory leadership race: Boris Johnson
‘ducking important questions’ (2019,
Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora | 21
Ardik Ardianto | Translating That: An Ideational Correspondence Analysis of Machine Translation

June 23), BBC News. Retrieved from

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-
48736968.
Vinay, J.-P., & Darbelnet, J. (1995).
Comparative stylistics of French and
English: A methodology for translation.
John Benjamins.
Why a group of US state senators are being
hunted by police (2019, June 23),
BBC News. Retrieved from
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-
canada-48737711.
Williams, J., & Chesterman, A. (2002). The
map: A beginner’s guide to doing
research in translation studies. St.
Jerome Pub.

Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora | 22